Canada - Christine Jessop, 9, Queensville, Ont, 3 Oct 1984 *killer identified* #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
I have not seen it referred to anywhere except for the family making statements about it. It’s unclear whether they brought that to the attention of LE at the time.

As the husbands appeared to be friends, there’s other possibilities. CH may’ve learned of his wife’s visit that day through a casual comment during his earlier visit with him. On the other hand CH may’ve simply dropped by the Jessop home for coffee or something if he happened to be close by and cellphones didn’t exist in those days, then discovered CJ was alone.

These scenarios are just examples of why it can never be proven 36 years after the fact what actually happened. However even if this case had gone to trial a conviction is based on proof beyond reasonable doubt that CH murdered the child. The best the prosecution most often can do is present a theory of the sequence of events.
 
She and her family won’t be making public statements again to the media. Won’t she be questioned again though in relation to other tips that come in surrounding CH? Such as, if they get a tip that CH was doing something suspect during a certain time, won’t LE need to fit all those pieces of the puzzle together by contacting her again to determine if she can recall certain details that match with the tip? Just curious how that might work.
Yes, I think they will continue to question her depending on what evidence they find as the investigation continues, especially if they think he may be involved in other crimes. She, or her children, may remember details surrounding those events or they may not. The family of his deceased wife may be able to offer some information, too. Imo
 
Yes, I think they will continue to question her depending on what evidence they find as the investigation continues, especially if they think he may be involved in other crimes. She, or her children, may remember details surrounding those events or they may not. The family of his deceased wife may be able to offer some information, too. Imo

Family members or friends connected with other unsolved crimes, who remember CH was familiar with the victim in some way would be a good start.

But I’d imagine strong evidence directly connecting him to any such cases would still be required as it’s always a risk to assume a dead man is guilty and close a file. Many a unconvicted murderer would shrill at wrongful allegations, much like CH must’ve done when GPM was initially found guilty for a horrible crime he didn’t commit.
 
Last edited:
She's in a tough spot.

There are others in the spotlight as well. CH has kids, albeit grown, but still a shocking revelation to deal with.

I can't imagine how I would feel if I was suddenly made aware that my former husband or father was the guy that murdered Christine Jessop.

This was a huge case at the time. We all knew about her murder and GPM. This is big stuff to deal with and not some little robbery.

I think she did the right thing. Co-operate with LE, make your brief statement and that's it.

MOO

I can’t imagine how I’d feel either but in my opinion the woman is lucky her and her children escaped the marriage alive and well. IMO anyone who’s capable of violently assaulting and killing a child is just as apt to murder a spouse especially during a marriage breakup if it’s acrimonious or if he believed they were aware of incriminating information against him.
 
Technology builds a family tree. His name came up. He killed himself so they would have taken a blood sample-which they had. It was a match. He did it.

Even without a DNA sample, as soon as his name came up they would have established a connection to the family and it would have been obvious that he did it. Already having the DNA on file just sped up the process of confirming it was him. Any judge would have granted permission to get a DNA sample once the police connected his name to the family.
Absolutely!!! There is no question about his guilt, and he would've been convicted if alive and sent to prison! The science is irrefutable.
 
CANADA - Canada - Christine Jessop, 9, Queensville, Ont, 3 Oct 1984 - #1

From Thread 1, Page 4, posted by Dedpanman -- referrring to Detective Sergeant Neale Tweedy speaking at the Standing Senate Committee.

So, based on what this police officer spoke about, his team evaluated 27,000 people and compared DNA from 325 men. Yet CH was somehow overlooked in all of that.
____________________________________________________________

This is from "Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs" Issue 44 - Evidence I post it here to provide context for those of you who don't know what happened after GPM was cleared in 1995 by the DNA evidence.

OTTAWA, Thursday, November 26, 1998

Detective Sergeant Neale Tweedy, Toronto Police Service, Canadian Police Association:

"I have been a police officer for 27 years, 17 of those as a homicide investigator, trainer and supervisor. As such, I have extensive experience in all facets of death investigation, including crime scene management, crime scene interpretation, evidence collection, suspect elimination, interviewing, law and procedure, information management, victim management and evidence presentation, to name but a few of the elements of the process. I previously have been acknowledged as an expert witness in the Ontario Court General Division in the discipline of homicide investigation.

During my time as a homicide detective, I have been involved in the investigation of a number of murder cases where rape was inflicted on the victim and was a primary or secondary motive for the crime. Christine Prince, Ruth Stern, Rupy Sanghera, Tania Anikejew, Nicole Morin, Andrea Atkinson, Kala Clauduz, Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffey, are names of but a few of the women and children whose lives were taken. Like a slide show, I can see the crime scenes in my mind's eye.

In January of 1995, I was placed in charge of one of Canada's most well publicized murder cases; the 1984 abduction, rape and murder of 9-year-old Christine Jessop of Queensville, Ontario. For 11 years Guy Paul Morin had been wrongfully accused, and DNA cleared him.

...

Since that time, I have been attempting to identify Christine's killer, primarily through taking blood or saliva samples from possible suspects. My investigation required my team's evaluation of 27,000 persons. I have seen to it that approximately 325 men have had their DNA compared to the calling card that Christine's killer left. Many of these 325 are respectable citizens who were linked directly or indirectly to Christine as family, friends or neighbours.

As citizens of the country, and wishing to assist my investigation, they provided consensual samples of their DNA. It was really just a prick on the tip of their fingers. This allowed my investigation to move past the possibility that the killer was known to Christine or her family. The rest, and vast majority of the 325, were men with a history of sexual assault, pedophilia and murder.

Unfortunately, to date, I have been unable to identify this child's killer. In a world that is highly computerized, with databases everywhere, I was reduced to writing letters to 1,000 police agencies and forensic laboratories across North America in my search for the match to the DNA marker that was left at the murder scene. The possibility of Christine's killers slipping through the cracks of this investigative technique are very large indeed, and despite my best efforts, I cannot be satisfied that this has not occurred.

In my 27 years of policing, I can think of no piece of legislation that will have a more significant and direct impact on crime prevention than Bill C-3. The benefits will be seen immediately, and will directly equate into solving a greater number of these crimes. They will also have a meaningful deterrent factor resulting in less violence against victims, especially women and children."
 
CANADA - Canada - Christine Jessop, 9, Queensville, Ont, 3 Oct 1984 - #1

From Thread 1, Page 4, posted by Dedpanman -- referrring to Detective Sergeant Neale Tweedy speaking at the Standing Senate Committee.

So, based on what this police officer spoke about, his team evaluated 27,000 people and compared DNA from 325 men. Yet CH was somehow overlooked in all of that.
____________________________________________________________

This is from "Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs" Issue 44 - Evidence I post it here to provide context for those of you who don't know what happened after GPM was cleared in 1995 by the DNA evidence.

OTTAWA, Thursday, November 26, 1998

Detective Sergeant Neale Tweedy, Toronto Police Service, Canadian Police Association:

"I have been a police officer for 27 years, 17 of those as a homicide investigator, trainer and supervisor. As such, I have extensive experience in all facets of death investigation, including crime scene management, crime scene interpretation, evidence collection, suspect elimination, interviewing, law and procedure, information management, victim management and evidence presentation, to name but a few of the elements of the process. I previously have been acknowledged as an expert witness in the Ontario Court General Division in the discipline of homicide investigation.

During my time as a homicide detective, I have been involved in the investigation of a number of murder cases where rape was inflicted on the victim and was a primary or secondary motive for the crime. Christine Prince, Ruth Stern, Rupy Sanghera, Tania Anikejew, Nicole Morin, Andrea Atkinson, Kala Clauduz, Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffey, are names of but a few of the women and children whose lives were taken. Like a slide show, I can see the crime scenes in my mind's eye.

In January of 1995, I was placed in charge of one of Canada's most well publicized murder cases; the 1984 abduction, rape and murder of 9-year-old Christine Jessop of Queensville, Ontario. For 11 years Guy Paul Morin had been wrongfully accused, and DNA cleared him.

...

Since that time, I have been attempting to identify Christine's killer, primarily through taking blood or saliva samples from possible suspects. My investigation required my team's evaluation of 27,000 persons. I have seen to it that approximately 325 men have had their DNA compared to the calling card that Christine's killer left. Many of these 325 are respectable citizens who were linked directly or indirectly to Christine as family, friends or neighbours.

As citizens of the country, and wishing to assist my investigation, they provided consensual samples of their DNA. It was really just a prick on the tip of their fingers. This allowed my investigation to move past the possibility that the killer was known to Christine or her family. The rest, and vast majority of the 325, were men with a history of sexual assault, pedophilia and murder.

Unfortunately, to date, I have been unable to identify this child's killer. In a world that is highly computerized, with databases everywhere, I was reduced to writing letters to 1,000 police agencies and forensic laboratories across North America in my search for the match to the DNA marker that was left at the murder scene. The possibility of Christine's killers slipping through the cracks of this investigative technique are very large indeed, and despite my best efforts, I cannot be satisfied that this has not occurred.

In my 27 years of policing, I can think of no piece of legislation that will have a more significant and direct impact on crime prevention than Bill C-3. The benefits will be seen immediately, and will directly equate into solving a greater number of these crimes. They will also have a meaningful deterrent factor resulting in less violence against victims, especially women and children."
 
Are we (and LE) satisfied that CH acted alone in this crime? I'd like to know how he he knew of / learned about the location where little CJ's remains were found. Did he know someone there? Had a delivery there in the past? Set up a service for someone there in the past? Towed the trailer there for someone? This wasn't an area you'd KNOW about in my opinion from having just driven around the area on a whim with an abducted 9 year old in your vehicle. The connection to the location is super concerning to me, is it to anyone else?

I said from day one that whoever the perp was...had to know of that location on Concession 4.... or know the people that owned the,property.
I will not believe he randomly picked it.
I hope we find out the answer.
 
Astounding! Talk about 'in plain sight!' Unbelievably overlooked, I just can't comprehend that.

It is unbelievable that CJ's investigation assigned to Neale Tweedy after GPM's exoneration never included CH. Tweedy would have to rely on the Jessop's to supply names of people who were friends of the family, or who were linked to the family. CH's wife was a current good friend of CJ's mother, and she and CH had been friends with the Jessops before they moved to Queensville. She also worked at the same company where CJ's father was employed. It seems that neither Jessop parent thought of the Hoovers when supplying names to LE back then, or any time since then.

This seems incredulous, knowing now, that Mrs. Jessop actually spoke on the phone to CH's wife the day she was abducted. Did LE not ask her about any phone calls that day in 1984? Did Tweedy not ask her the same question in 1995? I can't comprehend it either, and at this time won't assume who was responsible for this oversight.

Since that time, I have been attempting to identify Christine's killer, primarily through taking blood or saliva samples from possible suspects. My investigation required my team's evaluation of 27,000 persons. I have seen to it that approximately 325 men have had their DNA compared to the calling card that Christine's killer left. Many of these 325 are respectable citizens who were linked directly or indirectly to Christine as family, friends or neighbours."

Senate of Canada - Committees
 
It is unbelievable that CJ's investigation assigned to Neale Tweedy after GPM's exoneration never included CH. Tweedy would have to rely on the Jessop's to supply names of people who were friends of the family, or who were linked to the family. CH's wife was a current good friend of CJ's mother, and she and CH had been friends with the Jessops before they moved to Queensville. She also worked at the same company where CJ's father was employed. It seems that neither Jessop parent thought of the Hoovers when supplying names to LE back then, or any time since then.

This seems incredulous, knowing now, that Mrs. Jessop actually spoke on the phone to CH's wife the day she was abducted. Did LE not ask her about any phone calls that day in 1984? Did Tweedy not ask her the same question in 1995? I can't comprehend it either, and at this time won't assume who was responsible for this oversight.

Since that time, I have been attempting to identify Christine's killer, primarily through taking blood or saliva samples from possible suspects. My investigation required my team's evaluation of 27,000 persons. I have seen to it that approximately 325 men have had their DNA compared to the calling card that Christine's killer left. Many of these 325 are respectable citizens who were linked directly or indirectly to Christine as family, friends or neighbours."

Senate of Canada - Committees
 
Our GlobalTV Canada interview with them a few weeks ago and what KJ said: "“There were three people my mother told that morning we went to visit my dad in jail and that Christine wasn’t coming,” he said, adding he had forgotten that his mother had told Hoover’s wife."
Okay, going by the above statement it is unclear if they mentioned Hoover's wife at the time being 'in the know' but surely LE at the time would've found out/been told about the friendship between the 2 families somehow, and checked into the Hoovers as their kids would visit back and forth? I would think LE would have seen CH in the course of events such as the search itself, the funeral, etc. etc.
 
Last edited:
While talking on the phone to Mrs Jessop....Hoover’s wife would have heard Christine crying that morning.
Crying because she wanted to go with Kenny and mom to see dad in jail.
Most likely,the wife innocently told hubby about it.
How the hell was he able to disappear all evening with no suspicions.
I just knew Christines killer had to know her.... evil man.
 
In the quoted text above, it notes the DNA samples were provided consensually. I wonder if the issue is not whether CH flew under the radar somehow, but rather, that he wasn't willing to come in for a finger-prick?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
148
Guests online
960
Total visitors
1,108

Forum statistics

Threads
602,189
Messages
18,136,403
Members
231,266
Latest member
meteora47
Back
Top